SC Stays Probe Against Pinarayi Vijayan in CMRL-Exalogic Case for 7 Days
The Supreme Court has suspended the investigation into Pinarayi Vijayan and family in the CMRL-Exalogic case for 7 days, questioning the ED's role.
The Supreme Court has stepped in to provide temporary relief to former Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter Veena Thaikkandiyil, and his son-in-law Mohammed Riyas. In a significant move on Wednesday, the apex court stayed the investigation for one week in the CMRL-Exalogic corruption case, allowing the petitioners to seek interim relief from the Kerala High Court's division bench.
A Brief Pause in the Investigation
A vacation bench comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana set aside a previous order from the High Court division bench that had denied the petitioners leave to appeal against a single judge's direction to register an FIR. While the court clarified that the FIR itself remains valid, it ordered that the actual investigation be suspended for seven days. This window is intended to give the petitioners an opportunity to approach the appellate court.
Justice Bagchi stated, “The FIR is registered. That is it. We will allow the FIR to exist, but we will stall the investigation.”
Supreme Court Questions the "Haste"
The apex court raised critical questions regarding the process that led to the FIR. The bench questioned why the single judge had ordered the registration of the case with such haste based on a communication from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). This was particularly noted because the State had already established a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to carry out a preliminary inquiry.
Furthermore, the court pointed out that Pinarayi Vijayan had not been given a hearing before the order for the FIR was passed.
Warning to the Enforcement Directorate
In a stern observation, the bench cautioned the ED against overstepping its statutory boundaries to influence other investigative agencies. Justice Bagchi remarked, “Don't use the process of statutory powers to meddle into the statutory domain of other entities,” adding that the PMLA cannot act as a “super-administrator mandating everything everywhere.”
The court also noted that it needs to examine whether an ED communication under Section 66(2) legally obliges a State agency to register an FIR in corruption cases, rejecting the argument that previous judgments made such registration mandatory in every single instance.
The Core of the Dispute
The legal battle centers on allegations of corruption and conspiracy involving financial transactions between Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL) and Exalogic Solutions, a now-defunct firm owned by Veena Thaikkandiyil. The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) registered the FIRs following a report from the ED, which alleged that CMRL improperly transferred Rs 2.78 crore.
Arguments from Both Sides
- For the Petitioners: Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra argued that the registration of the FIR happened without hearing Vijayan and questioned the legal obligation of the State to act solely on the ED's recommendation.
- For the Complainant: KM Shajahan maintained that the ED's communication created a mandatory obligation for the State to file the FIR.
- For the ED: Counsel Zoheb Hossain submitted that the evidence collected disclosed cognisable offences.
What Happens Next?
The Supreme Court emphasized that its current observations are limited to the petitioners' right to appeal and do not reflect an opinion on the actual merits of the corruption case. The Kerala High Court division bench is now free to independently decide on the appeal and any requests for interim relief.
Prior to this, the High Court division bench had refused to interfere with the FIR, stating that an accused in a corruption case does not have a right to be heard before an FIR is registered, though it acknowledged their right to pursue other legal remedies.